Real estate General topic

[kenmbz]

I remember driving down to the Keys through Homestead after it got hit by a hurricane.
Almost every house was damaged, they said 25,000 homes, and looking at the spread of damage it was easy to believe.

LA is big and the damage is significant based on the areas and the fire maps.
A count of 12,000 buildings so far, and yes , who knows what is a building, could be a shed.
But it's still a large swath in 3 different areas with multiple fires.
And it's not over yet.

This summer was one of our driest, even without wind , 3 fires took off.
Luckily all three were put out before they spread, and mostly fields and crops damaged.

We are pretty spread out here allowing the fireman to form breaks and get in front of the fires.
We had a fire in town and one down the block, both building fires and put out quickly.
One, a garage was completely destroyed, another at a hotel was limited by new construction being to code and quick response by 3 fire teams.

We had an arsonist , who finally got caught trying to torch a local bar. She had already destroyed 3 houses (one of them twice). No motive, just nuts.
Not much the fire dept could do once they took hold.

So trick is to have good fire alarms and have central monitoring.
The three houses did not have this and the people were not home when she set the fires, so called in by passing motorists, too late for FD to do much except put them out.

LA catches fire every year, some years they have fires big enough to jump multilane highways.
Talk about high risk and no one has done anything to stop the spread.
They could:
Clear brush - not allowed
Use tile or cement roofs - no one wants to spend and gov won't enforce.
Have local water tanks filled from runoff - They have said this will happen so may times...
Have min distance between houses or build less houses - but everyone with $$$ wants to live there.

Last time I was in LA (August) they were building up on most of the hills outside the city, the ones that are bare of trees due to fires in the early 1900's and the ones that are known to become mud slides on any big rains.
insanity.

 

[paulsharvey]

So, I dont know how insurance might work with that; but I've heard from others in FLa, we get our letter "replace or provide inspection of roof, or insurance is canceled". Owner puts perm metal roof on, and boom, rates go Up. Even though the roof is more storm resistant.... (more fire resistant too)

I would be in favor of insurance offering discounts to people who remove trees near the home (that applies to storms, fires, ice storms, and general tree damage), but they never seem to offer a carrot, just a stick.

 

[ultrarunner]

I'm just glad we're all experts here and can pass judgement on the professionals!

It would not be the first time professionals were wrong…

It also comes down to allocating resources… your home may be your priority but may not be to the professionals in a sea of thousands of priority homes.

The Doc and his son credited with saving several beach front homes did have an escape plan… either by way of the sandy beach or by sea on paddle boards…

Another guy was on the radio protecting his home and as a professional scuba diver his back up plan was to lay low in his swimming pool with cache of full air tanks.

 

[ultrarunner]

You can't really make that statement. Conditions varied by neighborhood, one having access to power and water while another did not. Others found the line of fire approaching their home at a time of day or week when winds were at their worst, versus another facing that condition at a more favorable time with lower winds or those blowing in a favorable direction.

Weren't the winds blowing something like 40 - 60 mph one day? No one is fighting a wildfire back with DIY equipment, under those conditions.

There's also the simple fact that some are more mechanically capable than others. An engineer, plumber, or mechanic is going to have a better chance at saving their house than the average chiropractor, psychologist, or illustrator.

Surely some could have been saved that were lost. But "all the homes that were lost"? C'mon...

A brain surgeon did just this and saved several homes acknowledge as such by the pros…

In short they kept putting out hotspots…

Brain surgeon saved his entire Malibu street from LA's wildfires

Chester Griffiths, 62, had just finished performing brain surgery when he dashed to his car and drove across Los Angeles to save his beachfront home from being engulfed in fire.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[paulsharvey]

I admitted I'm not an expert on the environment and specifics of the fires out there. Yes, we get wild fires every year here in FLa, in the dry spring, and if we have a dry summer, combined with a couple months of no rain from spring, it can getting pretty bad, but its not the wind driven stuff.

I do know for a fire, you need fuel, but you also can't just have gravel everywhere, either. I would think planned off peak controlled fires would be a useful tool out there too, but again, I admit that I don't know.

I am pretty familiar with hurricanes, and that

 

[paulsharvey]

We also sometimes have had fires that burn for months and months, when they get down to the peat in the Prarie bottoms, and they smolder and smoke for 4 or 5 months, and randomly pop back up.

 

[ericm979]

I do know for a fire, you need fuel,

For the fires in LA, the houses were the fuel. Once a few houses catch fire, with the strong wind, the fire is self-perpetuating until it runs out of houses. This has happened many times in the last decade: Paradise CA, outside Denver, Santa Rosa, Redding, Southern Oregon are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Some started in wildlands near houses and then moved into the suburbs but some started in the suburbs.

Houses burn hot. The houses next door in a suburb are usually close enough that they are going to take a lot of heat. Once a window fails it's all over.

Anything that burns vigorously in a strong wind sends a lot of embers downwind. So not only does the fire go from house to house, there's also spot fires in front of of the fire front.

That's pretty much impossible to fight once it gets to a certain size.

It's interesting that a lot of pics of burnt houses in LA show burnt husks of houses with intact vegetation around them. The houses are more flammable.

but you also can't just have gravel everywhere, either. I would think planned off peak controlled fires would be a useful tool out there too, but again, I admit that I don't know.

Many of the houses in Altadena and Palisades were older. That usually means more flammable. California upgraded building codes for areas in the WUI to include a bunch of measures to reduce ignition potential. The houses built to that code in Paradise did significantly better than the average house.


We could apply that to all houses. But it would only get done on new houses and those that are significantly remodeled. Which will be a low percentage in most places. It'd have to be a mandated retrofit to be really useful and Americans hate it when the government tells them what to do. So that's not happening.

I am pretty familiar with hurricanes

I'll take fire and earthquakes myself.

 

[ultrarunner]

For the fires in LA, the houses were the fuel. Once a few houses catch fire, with the strong wind, the fire is self-perpetuating until it runs out of houses. This has happened many times in the last decade: Paradise CA, outside Denver, Santa Rosa, Redding, Southern Oregon are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Some started in wildlands near houses and then moved into the suburbs but some started in the suburbs.

Houses burn hot. The houses next door in a suburb are usually close enough that they are going to take a lot of heat. Once a window fails it's all over.

Anything that burns vigorously in a strong wind sends a lot of embers downwind. So not only does the fire go from house to house, there's also spot fires in front of of the fire front.

That's pretty much impossible to fight once it gets to a certain size.

It's interesting that a lot of pics of burnt houses in LA show burnt husks of houses with intact vegetation around them. The houses are more flammable.



Many of the houses in Altadena and Palisades were older. That usually means more flammable. California upgraded building codes for areas in the WUI to include a bunch of measures to reduce ignition potential. The houses built to that code in Paradise did significantly better than the average house.


We could apply that to all houses. But it would only get done on new houses and those that are significantly remodeled. Which will be a low percentage in most places. It'd have to be a mandated retrofit to be really useful and Americans hate it when the government tells them what to do. So that's not happening.


I'll take fire and earthquakes myself.

The push now is to build infill and ADU 3' from lot line as increasing housing is priority one.

Window glass failure is often the precursor if the roof is ceramic or cement.

I've been told triple pane windows are better in several ways and fire rated shutters could go a long way and not usually difficult.

I live in an area where trees are sacrosanct and often within arms length of structures after protected for decades...

On a side note read some stats that man made is by far the leading cause of fire loss... on purpose or negligence...

 

[WinterDeere]

I'll take fire and earthquakes myself.

It must be some universal quirk of human nature, that we're all more comfortable with our own local disasters, than those we see others suffer through on TV. Tornados terrify the mid-Atlantic folk, and Hurricanes terrify those living in earthquake zones.

Fire is the one that bothers me most. I'm fine with our hurricanes, but I chose and maintain my house accordingly. We did have a rare tornado do a bunch of damage in our area five years ago, but the folks in Oklahoma would've probably laughed at the thing, only upper Eff-1 territory. It did help straighten the previously-leaning steeple on my church, built 1740's... hand of God?

 

[ericm979]

It must be some universal quirk of human nature, that we're all more comfortable with our own local disasters, than those we see others suffer through on TV. Tornados terrify the mid-Atlantic folk, and Hurricanes terrify those living in earthquake zones.

Fire is the one that bothers me most. I'm fine with our hurricanes, but I chose and maintain my house accordingly. We did have a rare tornado do a bunch of damage in our area five years ago, but the folks in Oklahoma would've probably laughed at the thing, only upper Eff-1 territory. It did help straighten the previously-leaning steeple on my church, built 1740's... hand of God?

As a native Californian I find hurricanes and especially tornadoes terrifying. We don't get those. I have some understanding of fire having spent a few years on fire crews. I used to enjoy earthquakes until the '89 one which was the first that actually had me worried.

Here's a pic of a burned out house from the Palisades fire that I grabbed at random, literally the first I clicked on in the tool to check building status:

There's a lot of pics like this, with intact vegetation around the house. Those trees appear to be Eucalyptus which are famous for being highly flammable. They didn't even burn. The houses are the fuel. Tree preservation ordinances aren't the problem here.

I hope the residents got out with all that was important to them, they're safe and housed now, and they can rebuild quickly.